Subscriber JohnDory Posted November 8, 2013 Subscriber Share Posted November 8, 2013 anyone got any thoughts on http://forum.trackbase.net/threads/2111-STAC-Beta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management TheSilencerPL Posted November 8, 2013 Management Share Posted November 8, 2013 Replacing the et.exe with the AC binary is a bad idea in my opinion. First of all it breaks the et scene by adding another binary, 2nd it does not allow you to use features of et:legacy improvements if someone wanted to use what they have added to the et.I thought they would do it in a way AVs are done as an external app, but this way of implementing it is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber JohnDory Posted November 8, 2013 Author Subscriber Share Posted November 8, 2013 that's what I was thinking not that we use et:legacy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management gaoesa Posted November 8, 2013 Management Share Posted November 8, 2013 I also would prefer it as a standalone. I don't like the idea of getting my ET.exe replaced by a third party. Also, the method of distributing it in a custom silent pk3 with modified silent binaries makes it harder to be sure of the content. In the worst case, there will be a lot of different silent pk3 files that players have to download. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sol Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 Replacing the et.exe with the AC binary is a bad idea in my opinion. First of all it breaks the et scene by adding another binary, 2nd it does not allow you to use features of et:legacy improvements if someone wanted to use what they have added to the et.I thought they would do it in a way AVs are done as an external app, but this way of implementing it is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion.We are happy to have know up with another method but there is no another way in my opinion, but server admins choosing easiest path. About et:legacy I wanted to partner with them but they refused, I can't support another versions because it is associated with endless time with debuging binary over and over to find what I need, also it is not legal to use external closed libraries with GPL lisence. I also would prefer it as a standalone. I don't like the idea of getting my ET.exe replaced by a third party. Also, the method of distributing it in a custom silent pk3 with modified silent binaries makes it harder to be sure of the content. In the worst case, there will be a lot of different silent pk3 files that players have to download.I don't modified any binaries, it uses proxy to gain access and as always it asking client to install or not this. Also I have mentioned admins to keep it renamed because it would confuse clients and in the worst case they will need to download it again and again.I could create external installer as well but it would works only for competitive side which doesn't depend on me as in random player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management gaoesa Posted November 8, 2013 Management Share Posted November 8, 2013 About et:legacy I wanted to partner with them but they refused I suppose this is because of TrackBase and your involvement with the ET 3.00. I believe you're personally just trying to be practical as ET Legacy doesn't support multiple protocols. But I also think that TrackBase had no reason or grounds to break the GPL to protect couple tiny features integrated into a very large code base for it's own benefit. Especially since there are no security related reasons for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.